To answer the question more specifically, to manage that risk because of where we are, there are options in front of us. We can start digging the hole by making some assumptions about the minimum size of that hole.
And just going back to when we met about the elm tree, one of the things the committee actually asked us to look at doing was advancing excavation so that we could replant in the east pleasure grounds sooner than later, and we are looking at that.
But what is the minimum footprint that we know we're going to need to make it safe to start digging that hole, so that when Parliament comes back we can talk a little bit more? Having said that, some of the early decisions and engagements that we're trying to get at are discussions that we presented here today around things like committee rooms, which would ultimately influence decisions around how big that hole is going to be, as an example.
I can continue to try to clarify this. I'm trying to answer your question directly.